Hello Janos, Am Sonntag, den 31.03.2013, 00:14 +0100 schrieb Janos SUTO: > > well, all these actions are logged to the maillog file. > I see. I thought about long-term archiving the mail log, too.
> However creating a separate table for every incoming email > would > basically duplicate the metadata table, so you can expect another huge > table. I see. Although that won't be a problem for me, there will be cases where the database size matters. Therefore it would make sense to make such a log file optional (like the audit log). > > How long would you keep this data? Well, you have to keep emails for 6 or 10 years (depending on the content, so the advice is to always go for 10 years). But as the retention period doesn't necessarily start when you receive a message, it may very well be 14 or 15 years. For this time I would have to keep the information about the processed messages, too. > Which do you prefer: inserting the > corresponding > records on the fly to the database right after processing, or post > processing > of the maillog file via a perl/php/... script? As I understand the law, I would have to go with the former. Parsing the log file afterwards would make it possible to fiddle with the log before it gets parsed. > Is it enough to records > these > data for emails received by the piler daemon or you want them for > imported > emails too? The more I think about it, I'd try to strike a balance between the wishes of the tax authorities and the database size. Messages which enter the archive the usual way, i.e. via SMTP, can always be displayed to and analyzed by the authorities. I'll only have to explain those messages wo didn't make it there. It should be enough to generate log entries for »unusual« cases. >From that point of view, pilerimport isn't the usual way to enter the archive, so I would go for log file entries when messages are imported with pilerimport. There isn't that much information available about archive solutions, whose producers claim compliance with the German law. :-( Thanks, Frank
